[davidosborne]

CALL NOW !!

[Support Free Republic]

Without the support of Freeper donations, Free Republic would go belly-up, leaving guys like The French Gynecologist to be unopposed. And we can't have that!

[WinOne4TheGipper]

I remember the Austin American- Statesman did something like this once. Disgusting.

[NonValueAdded]

Hey, they put the quotes in the wrong place ... they quoted "Michael" instead of "married."

[squarebarb]

You forgot to put the fecal alert.

[The Duke]

Who makes "sani-wipes"? I think maybe I need to invest(?)

[davidosborne]

UPDATE: When I called the St. Pete Times I was told that "the majority of Americans FAVOR homosexual marriage and that the majority of people who called stated that they were in FAVOR of their decision to publish same".... I asked if they would publish the ACTUAL numbers on the favorable vs. unfavorable comments and was told "NO"... I asked if they had any subscription cancelations as a result of their decison to publish this and she admitted they had a "FEW"..... I suggest we keep calling and ask them to publish the numbers... If they want to claim that the "Majority" support this garbage then show me the numbers and I will believe it....

[Beck_isright]

You called the Florida version of Pravda and think they care? That paper is good for two things and neither of them involve reading.

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

Please share this with your lists, Tonkin. See post # 13.

[JulieRNR21]

I just spoke with the Wedding Page Editor and learned that the decision to include same sex wedding announcements was made by the Executive Editor of St. Petersburg's Times. Please (politely) express your disapproval via email here:

timespresident@sptimes.com

I made the point that these unions are not legal in Florida & that SPT should not be printing these announcements since the paper is printed in FL.

She retorted that they are legal in Canada, VT & MA. I corrected her on MA and said that it was a ruling by the MA SC that is has not yet been acted on by the MA legislature.

She said that they have been getting both pro & con feedback but would not reveal the numbers.

I told her I found the announcement personally offensive and therefore would not be having the paper in my home again. She was sorry that I felt that way but said that the 'couple' in the announcement is 'very happy' that it was printed.

I responded that I believed that the paper was putting the 'happiness' of one couple above the concerns of the majority of its readers. I added that I believed their decision would ultimately hurt the newspaper's subscription circulation.

I urge you all to call:

1-800-333-7505 x8735 and then press 'zero' (operator) to get a live person....then ask to speak to the Wedding Announcement Editor.

Let's make ourselves heard on this issue!

[MindBender26]

Ann Glover, senior editor is now taking calls on this issue.

Questions for her.

What was the news value that caused one out-of-country wedding to be newsworthy enough to be covered in the paper?

A person's "sexual identity" is a very private issue, as is the "sexual identity" of one's family members. Did the St. Pete Times obtain the permission of all family members named before they named them in the story.

Was this printed more for the newsworthiness of the people involved, or more for the shock value of the event and its ramifications.

Since the article announces an event, and implies follow-on conduct, that many Times readers find objectionable, especially when it is exposed to their children, did the Times print any warning notice to readers, such as the notice we see before television airs a morally questionable program.

Did any of the people making the decision to run this story have a personal interest in it, as in are they lesbian or gay? Were readers advised of this? Should readers have been advised of this potential conflict of interest?

Since the Times has demonstrated a willingness to publicize overseas activities that are illegal in Florida, will the Times now take an advertisement for NAMBLA websites, Neo Nazi group websites, or will they be willing to publicize NAMBLA meetings in their "Community Calender" section?

The Times routinely asks for, and occasionally even sues for access to records of meetings that lead to important decisions regarding Floridians. Will the Times release the minutes of meetings that led to the decision to run this announcement?

[Rainmist]

So ?

[GOPJ]

Why "marriage" only between a man and a woman? Or only between a woman and a woman, or a man and a man?

Why not a marriage between a man and his bird? Or a woman and her best friend, and her best friend's cat? And groups of swingers, longing for the right to enjoy spousal company health benefits, should they be forgotten?

The question is not "why," but "why not"?

Remember, people who love 50 casual strangers were probably born that way. Who are we to judge? Inquiring minds and all that...

[Republican Wildcat]

Which one is the bride?

[trustandobey]

Thanks for the warning. Just e-mailed and will call in the morning. And to think we wanted to move to Florida!

[davidosborne]

Call and ask them if they will publish "San Francisco" Illegal Mariages......

[JamesA]

I don't know about you but I am sick of having this homo crap shoved down our throats..no pun intended. This is just another exhample of the decline in American moral values. Its sick and they will never convince me differently.

[Salvation]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

1660 The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman form with each other an intimate communion of life and love, has been founded and endowed with its own special laws by the Creator. By its very nature it is ordered to the good of the couple, as well as to the generation and education of children. Christ the Lord raised marriage between the baptized to the dignity of a sacrament (cf. CIC, can. 1055 § 1; cf. GS 48 § 1).

---

1625 The parties to a marriage covenant are a baptized man and woman, free to contract marriage, who freely express their consent; "to be free" means:

- not being under constraint;

- not impeded by any natural or ecclesiastical law.

---